I envision ‘allies’ would be independent nations under their own independent leaders, making their own independent political decisions. Sarmations in northern Briton sound more like mercenaries hired by Rome, firmly under Roman control, and are represented by II/56 Lancers (3Kn), II/78 Cataphractari (3Kn) or II/82 Foederati (3Kn).
After all, if ‘just troops of another nation fighting together’, then the II/32 Later Carthaginian Army would consist almost entirely of ‘allies’!
And it is interesting that you mention DBMM. I have started compiling (both got diverted by other projects) a new updated version of the “Army List Corrections” (see static.wikia.nocookie.net/fanaticus-dba/images/c/c3/Army_List_Corrections_for_DBA_3.0.pdf/revision/latest?cb=20180124064046 ) This new version will incorporate ‘preceded by <----> followed by’ information, as well as all the DBMM allies in green with dates so that players can ignore them if they wish… …since if DBMM has these extra allies, then why can’t DBA 3.0 do the same? Phil Barker has put a lot of effort into the DBMM allies and dates, and we would be foolish to just ignore it all.
Here is a small sample:-
I/3 Nubian Kush (3000–1480 BC) & Ethiopia (1480–1080 BC) prehistory ←→ later dominated by I/22a, revolts into I/46a. Enemies: I/2a, I/2b, I/3, I/7a, I/22a. Allies: I/2a Egyptians (in 2310 BC only), or Egyptian Mercenaries (if Kush in 1645-1480 BC with 3Bd + 4Bw + 4Bw/LH) (The Egyptians may have conquered Kush by 1480 BC, but Nubian-like tribes remained independent further south in Ethiopia)
I/4b Guti “Great Revolt” (2250–2112 BC) preceded by I/4a ←→ driven out by I/11b and followed by I/37a. Enemies: I/5b, I/9, I/11a, I/11b. Allies: (in 2250 BC only) I/5b Elamites and/or I/9 Mari, or (in 2193-2112 BC) I/11a Akkadian vassal city-states (DBMM also allows I/4a Anatolian allies in 2250 BC only, but these seem to be already part of the I/4b army in DBA. The Guti invaded and dominated Akkad, already weakened by the I/1c Sumerian Revolt, and took control of Sumeria)
I/5c Early Anshan, Susiana & Middle Elamites (2100–1401 BC) preceded by I/5b ←→ followed by I/5d. Enemies: I/4c, I/10, I/11b, I/12, I/15, I/19, I/21a, I/23a. Allies: (in 2100-1401 BC) I/4a Zagros Highlanders, or (in 2100-1850 BC) I/6a Amorites and/or I/10 Melukhkhans, or (in 1769 BC only) I/15 Mari and/or I/15 Amorite Babylon, or (in 1768 BC only) I/12 Eshnunnan vassals, or (in 1764 BC only) I/6a Malgi-Amorites and/or I/15 Assur and/or 1/12 Eshnunnan, or (in 1650-1595 BC) I/4c Kassites.
I/8c Dilmun, Saba, Ma’in or Qataban (1300–312 BC) preceded by I/8a ←→ replaced by II/23. Enemies: I/6b, I/8b, I/8c. Dilmun Allies: I/8a vassals (in 1300-312 BC), or I/21a Babylon (in 1300-1000 BC) Saba, Ma’in, Qataban Allies: I/8a vassals (in 1300-312 BC), or I/6b Arabs (in 700-312 BC)
I/19 Mitanni (1595–1274 BC) preceded by I/4c Hurrians ←→ conquered by I/24a and I/25a. Enemies: I/4c, I/5c, I/6b, I/15, I/16, I/19, I/20b, I/21a, I/22a, I/24a, I/25a. Allies: (in 1595-1341 BC) I/6a Amorites and/or I/20b Syro-Canaanites, or (in 1340-1274 BC) I/6a Amorites and/or I/24a Hittites. (Mittanni suffered from a series of succession civil wars beginning in 1390 BC)
Last Edit: Feb 14, 2022 20:58:52 GMT by stevie: ...work in progress...
Personal view is…yes, Sarmatians were present…but also so were many other Romanised clients/subject peoples, such as Numidians, Gauls etc. They may have been present, but the ‘ally’ status in DBA is (or seems to be) intended as a significant contribution from an allied state (eg Armenians +Romans, or whatever) rather than certain numbers of troops from a nationality who happened to be stationed somewhere …(otherwise there would be Dacian allies or Moorish allies for the defenders of Hadrians Wall etc, rather than units which, once upon a time, when they were recruited or set up, had had a significant number of troops from a particular area, and were named for the tribe or area they had once been recruited from).